National Early Years Research Day Proceedings - Volume 2
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
National Early Years Research Day Proceedings Volume 2 ISSN 2712-0236
Acknowledgments: Designed by: Lyndsey Cummins Edited by: Liz Kerrins, Kathleen Tuite © Early Childhood Ireland, 2021 ISSN: 2712-0236 Disclaimer: Early Childhood Ireland takes no responsibility for any errors, omissions, or contradictions which may exist in the report.
Message from Early Childhood Ireland
I’m delighted to welcome you to Volume 2 of Early Childhood Ireland’s National Early Years
Research Day Proceedings, containing selected papers delivered at an Online Research
Symposium, over three evenings in October 2020.
2020 was an extraordinary year for Ireland’s early learning and care and school-age
childcare sector. Indeed, it was an extraordinary year to be a global citizen. Much is written
and discussed about the resilience and resolve of our sector in the face of the COVID-19
pandemic, which led to the enforced closure of services, followed by challenging reopenings.
Children’s experiences of participation in settings and educators’ education and care
practices were altered by a series of public health measures - the grouping of children and
staff into ‘pods’; stricter infection control; physical distancing between parents and staff for
drop-off and collection of children, with limited parental entry to settings; and an increased
public and policy emphasis on outdoor play provision.
The theme of our 2020 research event, New Realities in Research in Early Learning and Care
– First 5, was set before COVID-19 and aimed to focus on how Ireland’s first national strategy
for babies and young children would and should frame the Irish research agenda on early
childhood. COVID-19 hit and suddenly we were in a very different reality.
Even during these incredibly stressful and uncertain times, providers, early years educators
and researchers continued to navigate professional development and learning pathways,
researching aspects of professional practice for improvement, investigating the impact of
public policy on early childhood education and care practices, and exploring children’s
experiences in settings. They continued to value and participate in professional learning
events like Early Childhood Ireland’s research day, to exchange knowledge and engage in
professional dialogue.
The 2020 presenters had submitted abstracts to Early Childhood Ireland’s Scientific
Committee in late 2019 for an in-person research day planned to take place in the Croke
Park Conference Centre in April 2020. Our organisation pivoted from an in-person one-day
event to a fully online research event, spread over three evenings. We cannot thank enough
all of those who submitted abstracts, the fifteen paper presenters, the keynote speaker, Dr
Nuala Connolly, from the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and
Youth, Professor Anne Looney, Dublin City University, who launched Volume One of our
research proceedings publication, and panel discussants: Marlene McCormack, Dublin City
3University; Dr Leah O’Toole, Maynooth University; Dr Anna Visser, Department of Children,
Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth, who persevered with us as Early Childhood
Ireland learned how best to deliver a meaningful event in an online world. We also would
like to thank the 500+ attendees. Those of you who would like to catch up on the three
evenings can view the recordings at www.earlychildhoodireland.ie.
Finally, I would like to thank all the authors with papers in this issue for their generosity
and collaboration. Early Childhood Ireland shares and values their curiosity and drive for
continuous professional learning. Thanks also to colleagues in all Early Childhood Ireland
teams, without whom the research event and this publication would not happen, but
particularly to Kathleen Tuite, the co-editor of this volume and co-organiser of the research
symposium.
Liz Kerrins,
Co-editor,
Director of Research
4Foreword
Dr. Nuala Connolly,
Early Years Research Specialist,
Department of Children, Equality, Disability,
Integration and Youth
I very much welcome the opportunity to write this foreword for the second volume of Early
Childhood Ireland’s National Early Years Research Day Proceedings publication.
Early Childhood Ireland has played an important role in continuing to keep the early
learning and care community connected throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. During this
challenging time, this year’s virtual research symposium by Early Childhood Ireland has
been an important forum for the early learning and care sector to share their research and
learning.
The COVID-19 pandemic has compelled all of us to reimagine how we design research,
how we engage with communities and stakeholders, and how we disseminate our findings.
Early Childhood Ireland has embraced a digital transition by taking their annual research
conference online. This year’s virtual platform provided an opportunity for students, staff,
researchers, academics, and policymakers to engage, discuss and contribute to the early
learning and care community in sharing key learning from research and practice.
Despite the enormous challenges of conducting research through a public health emergency,
the response from contributors, along with the quality of the research presented, is inspiring
and commendable. This publication captures a range of academic and reflective papers from
contributors.
Volume 2 of Early Childhood Ireland’s National Early Years Research Day Proceedings
continues to explore the collective progress of the sector in achieving the vision of First 5: A
Whole-of-Government Strategy for Babies, Young Children and their Families 2019-2028
(Government of Ireland, 2018). Research and evidence will remain essential as we continue
to implement an ambitious programme of policy reform in the years ahead.
The research collected in this publication reflects the importance of access to high-quality,
affordable, accessible and inclusive early learning and childcare for children and families, as
well as supporting the broader social and economic policy objectives.
Also reflected is the key role of the early learning and childcare workforce, recognised as
one of the most important drivers of quality in early learning and childcare settings. In this
context, I welcome also the research on childminders, and the emphasis on the value of
reflective practice to support the cycle of ongoing learning.
I also welcome the children’s rights perspective represented in the papers in this publication.
This perspective is also central to the development and implementation of national policy.
5Finally, I would like to acknowledge the research on transitions presented in this publication.
The moves into and through early learning and care and on to primary education are a
major transition in young children’s lives. We know that smooth transitions can ensure a
positive experience for children at all stages. This important phase in young children’s lives is
also supported by a number of actions in First 5 as an increasingly effective early childhood
system is developed.
As we continue to collectively live with COVID-19, these papers highlight how the early
learning and care workforce and the early learning and care sector as a whole have critically
adapted to the ‘new norm’, striving to provide experiences for children that remain a source
of joy and fulfilment.
As Early Years Research Specialist with the Department of Children, Equality, Disability,
Integration and Youth, I have read this publication with great enthusiasm. As research lead
for the programme of research flowing from First 5, I am thrilled to see the passion for
research among the early learning and care community and sector, which serves to highlight
the commitment and dedication to learn from experience, and to advance the knowledge-
base.
My warmest congratulations to the contributors and to Early Childhood Ireland in
overcoming the challenges of the past year to deliver an important and timely contribution
to the research landscape.
Dr. Nuala Connolly,
Early Years Research Specialist,
Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth.
6Table of Contents
Academic Papers
An exploration of school-readiness perspectives of early years professionals, 8
teachers, and parents in the Northwest of Ireland
Fiona Boyle, Sheila Garrity, Lynda Smyth
Early Years Practitioners’ perspectives of the inter-related concepts of ‘school 17
readiness’ and transition
Kathy Carter, Dr Niamh Gallagher
The Lost Art of Storytelling: To what extent do early year’s practitioners 24
value storytelling as a medium for early literacy development
Laura Maher
“I like playing with pretend light-up unicorns”: The rights-based and 30
democratic practice found in home-based childcare settings
Michelle Lehane
Professional Childminding in Ireland: ecocultural perspectives 38
Dr Miriam O’Regan
Orientation Quality, Complexity and Social Media – Looking with a 45
different lens
by Criona Blackburne
Reflective Paper
The living theory of Symbolic Violence 55
by Racheal Govan
7An exploration of school-readiness perspectives of early years
professionals, teachers, and parents in the Northwest of Ireland
by Fiona Boyle, Sheila Garrity, Lynda Smyth
Keywords: School readiness Transitions Primary school
Fiona Boyle: Fiona Boyle is a recent graduate from NUI Galway’s MA in Early Childhood Studies and
Practice. Working directly with preschool children, Fiona has become passionate about supporting
children’s transitions to primary school. She used this research to better understand how transitions can
be improved for all involved.
Sheila Garrity: Dr Sheila Garrity is passionate about supporting Early Childhood Educators to achieve their
personal and professional goals through lifelong study. As Academic Director (MA & BA Early Childhood
Studies, NUI Galway) Sheila encourages students to disseminate their research, share their knowledge
through conference presentations and publications, such as this.
Lynda Smyth: Lynda Smyth is presently involved in developing and teaching on a range of educational
programmes for ECEC. Lynda’s research interests include critical pedagogy, race, and reconceptualisation
of early childhood education. Lynda has worked in several roles in the early years sector, including
practitioner, manager, and mentor.
Abstract
School-readiness has been a pervasive term in the discourse of transitions within Irish
Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) policy, though this is shifting. Previously, the
language used within policies and frameworks have suggested ECEC as a time of preparing
children for school. More recently, First 5 (Ireland, 2019) has shifted the focus towards
promoting positive transitions through ready schools, collaboration between educators,
and instilling positive dispositions in children. For this reason, a small-scale master’s
research study was undertaken to explore school-readiness perspectives held by early years
professionals, primary school teachers, and parents. Data collected through semi-structured
interviews and open-ended questionnaires identified that participants focused on social and
emotional qualities of school-readiness. Although children are key actors within transitions,
their voices are missing due to the project’s time constraints. As school-readiness also
includes schools’ readiness for children (O’Kane, 2016), this research noted evidence of ‘ready
schools’, where teachers incorporate ready classroom practices, and adapt to meet children’s
needs. However, while First 5 (Ireland, 2019) encourages collaboration between educators in
ECEC and primary schools, inconsistent practices were identified in this project.
Introduction
Early childhood transitions have been the focus of policy developments (DES, 1999; DCYA,
2014; NCCA, 2019) and empirical research, both in Ireland and internationally (Dockett and
Perry 2009; Ring et al, 2016; O’Kane, 2016). First 5 - A Whole of Government Strategy for Babies,
Young Children and Their Families (First 5) (Ireland, 2019) states that positive transitions ‘help
to form good attitudes towards school which support strong school engagement and lead to
long-term benefits’ (p. 98). This article reports on a research project, undertaken as part of a
master’s degree at NUI Galway, investigating the perspectives and experiences of key actors
– parents, early years practitioners (EYPs), and primary school teachers (PSTs) – related
to school-readiness and early childhood transitions. While Let’s Get Ready (DECDIY, 2020)
8provides resources to parents and educators, the campaign was launched after this research,
and is not referenced throughout this piece. This article presents relevant policy and research
as a background to the study, before outlining the research methodology. Selected research
findings are then presented, with a discussion of key literature woven throughout.
Background
Discussions of early years transitions typically include the concept of ‘school-readiness’
(Dockett and Perry, 2009), though the terms are not interchangeable. Transitions are ‘the
process of moving from one situation to another and taking time to adjust’ (NCCA, 2019, p.1)
whereas school-readiness considers:
children’s readiness for school, families’, and communities’ readiness for school,
and also includes the school’s readiness for children, stressing the bidirectionality
between the child and the school (O’Kane 2016, p. 8).
First 5 (Ireland, 2019) and O’Kane (2016) note the importance of ‘ready schools’ that adapt
learning structures to meet children’s needs. However, an analysis of previous Irish policy
documents reveals a pervasive discourse promoting Early Childhood Education and Care
(ECEC) as responsible for school-readiness.
Ready to Learn (DES, 1999) suggested supporting children’s educational achievement through
high-quality ECEC, setting a pattern of viewing early years as sites for school preparation.
An imperative in introducing the universal, funded ECCE Scheme was that ‘pre-primary
education is a key determinant of student performance at all levels of education’ (WCCC,
2009). Similarly, Better Outcomes, Brighter Futures noted ECEC as important for ensuring
children are ready for school (DCYA, 2014). This discourse essentialises the purpose of ECEC
as a preparatory space.
Such a perspective impacts how EYPs, parents, and PSTs view ‘school-readiness’. PSTs’ beliefs
affect how they implement features of ‘ready schools’ (Ring et al, 2016), while EYPs’ and
parents’ beliefs impact how they prepare children for school (Lara-Cinisomo et al, 2008).
Understanding these stakeholders’ school-readiness views is crucial due to their influence on
children’s transitions, and their essential role in promoting positive transitions. Therefore,
this was the focus of the study reported through this article.
Insight into primary schools’ use of Aistear: the national curriculum framework (NCCA, 2009)
is also indicative of educators’ school-readiness perspectives. In ECEC, Aistear (ibid.)
guides EYPs on providing learning experiences that support children’s development by
prioritising children’s views, connections, and hands-on experiences. Learning experiences
are developed under themes of well-being, communicating, identity and belonging, and
exploring and thinking. While Aistear focuses on holistic learning, the primary school
curriculum (GOI, 1999) is broken into seven subject areas. Although both documents
emphasise hands-on learning, Ring et al (2016) identified that more formal practices often
occur in primary schools. Daly and Grant (2019) note that some children struggle with
transitioning from play-based to formal approaches. This reiterates the importance of
identifying school-readiness perspectives and current transition practices.
Methodology
This research sought to explore participants’ perspectives of the qualities and skills they
deemed important for starting school and to discuss preparations for the school transition. It
hoped to explore potential concerns and examine participants’ views on the ECCE Scheme’s
impact on children’s transitions.
9A convergent mixed-method design (Schram, 2014) under a pragmatic research paradigm
(ibid.) included semi-structured interviews with educators plus open-ended questionnaires
and follow-on interviews with parents. Participants were selected using purposeful sampling,
based on the criterion that they are key actors in this transition. Ethical approval was
granted by NUI Galway, ensuring the study was undertaken with integrity. In line with
GDPR, informed consent preceded all interviews and questionnaires. Pseudonyms are used
throughout this article, safeguarding the confidentiality of participants. Thematic analysis of
data, based on the views of eighty-five participants resulted in eight overarching themes. This
article focuses on three primary themes.
This was a focused study, engaging participants in the North-West of Ireland, to examine a
topic of national policy importance. Due to the small-scale, including the voice of the central
actor – the transitioning child – was not feasible, though it is recognised this inclusion
would have added to the story being told herein. While these findings are not meant to be
generalisable, they reveal important understandings based on lived experiences, adding to
the domestic literature on early childhood transitions.
Perspectives of readiness
Although children can be enrolled in primary school at four years old, most start school
by six years of age (Citizens Information, 2019). With over 100,000 children availing of the
ECCE scheme each year (DCEDIY, 2019), the scheme’s age requirements have impacted
school starting ages. Several parents noted that completing two preschool years was a
determinant factor in sending their child to school. However, they identified that additional
child-related factors played a role in this decision.
First 5 (Ireland, 2019) suggests ‘certain dispositions, skills and knowledge… help ease
transitions’ (p. 98). Although particular traits can help positive transitions, Graue (1992)
outlines that different attributes will be valued and expected within different communities.
Therefore, notwithstanding First 5’s position, the school-readiness views of a community will
determine the value placed on these qualities. This research revealed participants’ school-
readiness perspectives, categorising these as non-cognitive, cognitive, and physical skills.
Non-cognitive skills refer to behaviours, emotional regulation, social skills, and attention ( Jones
et al, 2015). Lara-Cinsomo et al (2008) noted that EYPs prioritise social skills and confidence.
PSTs also value social skills, emphasising independence, and concentration (O’Kane &
Hayes 2007; Ring et al 2016; Daly & Grant 2019). This research revealed similar findings, as
educators’ school-readiness views primarily surrounded social and emotional skills. Isabelle
and Fionnuala (PSTs) explained that being able to “interact with other children” and share was
expected to a certain extent. Barbara (EYP) stated “social skills would be a big one”, while Donna
(EYP) noted “being able to emotionally cope with being told no” is important.
Independence was also frequently referenced by educators. PSTs prioritised hanging up coats
and managing zippers, while the ability to open and close lunchboxes was also referenced.
Similarly, practicing these independence skills was emphasised by EYPs. Some PSTs
mentioned concentration, following instruction, and the ability “to sit and listen for at least
10-15 minutes” (Grainne-PST). This non-cognitive skill focus mirrors findings in the literature
(O’Kane & Hayes, 2007; Ring et al, 2016; Daly & Grant, 2019).
Parents also considered social skills, such as “navigate[ing] larger social situations”, a key feature
of readiness (See Table 1). Dispositions such as eagerness to start school and independence
are valued by parents. Similarly, literature identified an emphasis on ‘fitting in’, confidence,
10independence, and eagerness to attend school, among parents (Dockett & Perry 2004; Ring et
al. 2016).
30
25 Social Skills
Eager to Start School/Learn
20 Emotional Skills
Independence
15 Communication
Maturity
10 Confidence
Following Instruction
5 Concentration
Seperate from Parents
Resilience
0
Table 1: Non-cognitive Traits Highlighted in Parent Questionnaires
Cognitive abilities involve ‘achievement-oriented tasks, such as problem solving, and academic
abilities’ ( Jones et al, 2015, p. 2283). Contradicting previous research (Ring et al, 2016) that
pre-academic skills are privileged in ECEC, this study found consensus among educators that
“academics wouldn’t be of much importance” (Donna-EYP). Many EYPs explained that school-
readiness is not about ‘academics’ because “in school, they go back to the very beginning” (Kate-
EYP). Similarly, PSTs school-readiness views did not prioritise this knowledge. Fionnuala
(PST) said to “park all of the academics”. Grainne (PST) reiterated this view, saying letters are
“my end of the world”.
There was a common belief that some parents “place an awful lot of value on the academics”
(Ann-EYP) and “are more steered toward the academic side” of readiness (Barbara-EYP). Niamh
(PST) commented that parents believe their children are ready for school because they know
“their sounds and... how to write their name”. Ring et al (2016) noted similar findings with 66% of
parents believing children need to know letters, numbers, and writing before starting school.
Despite educators’ suspicions, and previous research, only 23% of parents in this study
identified “academics” as part of school-readiness (See Table 2).
11Refer to
Academics
23%
No Reference to
Academics
77%
Table 2: Views of Academics as School Readiness in Parent Questionnaires
Physical skills featured in Niklas et al (2018) survey of EYPs and PSTs and revealed that barely
25% consider physical development important for school-readiness. This contrasts Smith
and Glass’s (2019) position that ‘physical well-being sets the foundation for all other school-
readiness domains’ (p.5). In this research, only two PSTs noted physical skills within their
school-readiness beliefs, with Isabelle (PST) noting “decent balance and co-ordination” are
beneficial for starting school. Grainne (PST) advocated for more focus on children’s physical
development before school entry, sharing how she prioritises gross motor skills within
school-readiness: “if they can’t control their gross motor skills… how am I supposed to get them to hold
a pencil and follow a tiny little shape?”
Ready Schools
According to First 5 (Ireland, 2019) and O’Kane (2016), “ready schools” are crucial for positive
transitions. Ready schools ‘adapt their structure and learning environments to consider the
individual differences and needs of children’ (Sayers, 2012, in Ireland, 2019, p.98). Mó Scéal
(NCCA, 2019) identifies features of ready schools, including ready teachers and transition
practices.
In response to her concerns, Grainne (PST) focused on physical readiness. Both Joan and
Isabelle (PSTs) spoke of additional resources needed to support children acquiring English
as an additional language. Joan suggested responsibility fell to teachers to be prepared.
Additionally, one parent interviewed shared how a PST accommodated her child’s learning
style by teaching phonics through jumping jacks. These examples highlight how some PSTs
have adapted their teaching practices to meet children’s individual needs, coinciding with
First 5’s (Ireland, 2019) recommendations.
Ready teachers and their transition practices were also identified throughout data
collection. Parents highlighted preferred teacher dispositions of kindness, welcoming, and
understanding. This mirrors Ring et al’s (2016) findings that parents prefer teachers who are
not strict, understand children’s abilities, and create a nurturing environment. Transition
practices carried out by PSTs included putting children’s “names on their tables” (Isabelle),
and their “pictures on the wall so they know this is their classroom” (Grainne). Additionally, Joan
12uses visual timetables, and Grainne uses a “colour-coded scheme” to visually guide children
throughout the day. These examples reflect Mó Scéal’s recommendations in providing
welcoming classrooms, including visual aids, and allowing children to own their environment
(NCCA 2019).
Educator Collaboration
First 5 (Ireland, 2019) states that professional connections between EYPs and PSTs are
required for positive transitions. This facilitates ‘a greater understanding of the curriculum
and pedagogy in the different settings’ (NCCA, 2018, p.7). This research identified a rural/
urban divide regarding the degree of collaboration between educational settings.
Rural-based educators experience stronger connections, as there is typically a clear path
from preschool to the local primary school. The daily collection of school-aged children
and the necessary exchange of information supports regular interactions and informal
communication among educators; particularly closer to the end of term as Barbara (EYP)
and Grainne (PST) highlighted.
In contrast, urban-based participants identified collaboration was lacking due to the number
of educational settings in the area. Kate (EYP) identified six primary schools as follow-on
settings, while Fionnuala’s (PST) students come from “all over the place”. Both noted this
hinders their engagement with professionals from other settings. Ring et al (2018) found
proximity enhanced engagement. Urban PSTs (Hannah, Isabelle, Fionnuala) communicated
with EYPs only when a ‘concern’ arose, such as a special educational need, reflecting similar
findings by Ring et al (2016).
Confidentiality presents an additional barrier. Niamh (PST) highlighted that EYPs “can’t really
say [children] are or they aren’t ready for school”. O’Kane (2016, citing Cork City Partnership Ltd.,
2012) noted assumptions related to parents’ perceptions influences the content of shared
information.
Transfer documents (such as Mó Scéal or All About Me (AAM) books (SCCC 2015)) were
created to facilitate collaboration (NCCA, 2019; O’Kane & Murphy, 2016), as transferring
information about children’s learning can open relationships between settings (Daly &
Grant, 2019). However, O’Kane and Murphy (2016) note inconsistent collaboration between
educators, highlighting the need for greater policy and practice guidance. This research
revealed that the opinions on and use of transfer documents varied. AAM books, developed
by SCCC, were the primary transfer document referenced in data collection. Some parents
praised these books, saying it’s “good for the teacher to get to know the kids” (Cliona), while
PSTs question the tools’ authenticity, due to possible “assistance” with their completion.
Additionally, most participating EYPs stopped using AAM books because “they weren’t
very child-led” (Barbara). Therefore, while AAM was designed to help with collaboration,
participating educators in this study do not favour them.
Transfer documents also provide opportunities for curriculum continuity; ‘similar activities,
programme structure and content between preschool and infant classes’ (Ring et al, 2016,
p. 8). According to First 5 (Ireland, 2019), continuity can help facilitate positive transitions.
Similarly, Daly and Grant (2019, p. 84) identify that curriculum alignment ‘is critical to
children’s learning and development’. However, participating PSTs do not place emphasis
on AAM books’ contents, nor use them to build on children’s previous experiences. Isabelle
(PST) highlighted that “a lot of the things that would be in [AAM books] … you’d be doing again at
junior level anyway”. Additionally, while AAM is “somewhat helpful… it wouldn’t be, I suppose, the
13basis of your teaching” (Isabelle-PST). This suggests that while an overlap between learning in
ECCE/primary school can exist, PSTs do not appear to privilege children’s previous learning
outlined in AAM books.
Recommendation
Findings illustrate that transfer documents, like AAM books, do not work in practice. EYPs
dislike the adult-led books, while teachers admit that the documents do not influence
their practice. While Mó Scéal (NCCA 2019) documents follow a different format, their use
in practice was not evident throughout data collection. An alternative process to transfer
information is through PST visits to preschools. Allowing PSTs time to visit the incoming
children in their preschools provides opportunities for engagement between educators. PSTs
can observe the children’s interactions, review learning stories, and identify the children’s
interests and strengths. EYPs can also answer specific questions based on PSTs observations.
Additionally, these visits give the children another opportunity to meet their new teacher.
Conclusion
This research illustrates that participants value similar school-readiness qualities, prioritising
children’s social and emotional readiness, rather than academic preparation. Moreover,
schools appear to demonstrate adaptability in how they present their curriculum to children,
adjusting to children’s individual needs. However, while these findings indicate an evolving
discourse from ready child to ready schools, there are elements of the transition process that
need improvement. Although First 5 (Ireland, 2019) promotes collaboration across settings
to enhance positive transitions, findings reveal collaboration tends not to occur; neither in-
person nor through transfer documents. Therefore, vital communication between educators
is missing from the transition process.
Whereas collaborative supports and resources have been developed, as, outlined in First 5
(GOI, 2019), Mó Scéal (NCCA, 2019) and Let’s Get Ready (DCEDIY, 2020), there is currently
no national training on supporting transitions. Until training which outlines consistent and
cohesive practices exists, there will continue to be a gap in children’s transition experiences,
as this research reveals. These supports and training should address the challenges educators
face regarding transition communication, while also being considerate of the specific barriers
facing those in urban communities. This research offers unique, and often confirmatory
insight into transition practices and views. Findings recommend particular aspects that need
to be considered at both a macro and micro-level in order to promote positive transitions for
all children.
References
Citizens Information (2019). Starting school, available: https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/
education/primary_and_post_primary_education/going_to_primary_school/primary_education_
life_event.html [accessed 23 February 2020].
Daly, M. & Grant, D. (2019). ‘Mo Scéal: preschool to primary school transition’, An Leanbh Óg- The
OMEP Ireland Journal of Early Childhood Studies, 12(1), pp. 83-96.
Dockett, S. and Perry, B. (2004). ‘What makes a successful transition to school? Views from Australian
parents and teachers’, International Journal of Early Years Education, 12 (3), 217-230.
Dockett, S. and Perry, B. (2009). ‘Readiness for school: a relational construct’, Australasian Journal of
Early Childhood, 34 (1), 20-26.
14DCYA/Department of Children and Youth Affairs (2014). Better Outcomes, Brighter Future- The national
policy framework for children & young people 2014 – 2020, Dublin: Stationary Office, available: https://
assets.gov.ie/23796/961bbf5d975f4c88adc01a6fc5b4a7c4.pdf [accessed 14 January 2020].
DECDIY/Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth (2019). Over 800,000
children avail of first decade of free preschool | Annual budget jumps 172% since first roll out | Steep rise in the
school-starting age, available: https://www.gov.ie/en/press-release/c3cce7-over-800000-children-avail-
of-first-decade-of-free-preschool-annual/ [accessed 5 August 2021].
DECDIY/Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth (2020). Let’s get ready,
available: https://www.gov.ie/en/campaigns/1e8a3-lets-get-ready/ [accessed 10 August 2021].
DES/Department of Education and Science. (1999). Ready to learn: White paper on early childhood
education, Dublin: Stationary Office, available: https://www.education.ie/en/Publications/Policy-
Reports/Ready-to-Learn-White-Paper-on-Early-Childhood-Education.pdf [accessed 18 September
2019].
GOI/Government of Ireland (1999) Primary school curriculum: introduction, Dublin: The Stationary
Office, available: https://curriculumonline.ie/getmedia/c4a88a62-7818-4bb2-bb18-4c4ad37bc255/
PSEC_Introduction-to-Primary-Curriculum_Eng.pdf [accessed 13 December 2019].
Graue, M.E. (1992). ‘Social interpretations of readiness for kindergarten’, Early Childhood Research
Quarterly, 7 (2), 225-243.
Ireland, Government of (2019). First 5: A whole-of-government strategy for babies, young children
and their families 2019-2028, Dublin: Government Publications, available: https://assets.gov.
ie/31184/62acc54f4bdf4405b74e53a4afb8e71b.pdf [accessed 11 November 2019].
Jones, D.E., Greenberg, M. & Crowley, M. (2015). ‘Early social-emotional functioning and public health:
the relationship between kindergarten social competence and future Wellness’, American Journal of
Public Health, 105(11), 2283-2290.
Lara-Cinisomo, S., Sidle Fuligni, A., Ritchie, S., Howes, C. & Karoly, L. (2008). ‘Getting ready for
school: an examination of early childhood educators’ belief systems’, Early Childhood Education Journal,
35 (4), 343-349.
NCCA/National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (2009). Aistear: The early childhood curriculum
framework, Dublin: National Council for Curriculum and Assessment.
NCCA/National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (2018). Preschool to primary school transition
initiative final report, available: https://ncca.ie/media/4435/preschool-to-primary-school-transition-
initiative-final-report.pdf [accessed 15 November 2019].
NCCA/National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (2019). Supporting transitions: an overview,
available: https://www.aistearsiolta.ie/en/transitions/overview/supporting-transitions.pdf [accessed 13
December 2019].
Niklas, F., Cohrssn, C., Vidmar, M., Segerer, R., Schmiedeler, S., Galpin, R., Valeska Klemm, V., Kanlder,
S. & Tayler, C. (2018). ‘Early childhood professionals’ perceptions of children’s school readiness
characteristics in six countries’, International Journal of Educational Research, 90, 144-159.
15O’Kane, M. & Hayes, N. (2007). ‘The transition from preschool to school for children in Ireland:
Teachers views’, An Leanbh Óg- OMEP Ireland Journal of Education Studies, Vol 1, 125-139.
O’Kane, M. (2016). Research report no. 19: transition from preschool to primary school, Dublin: National
Council for Curriculum and Assessment, available: https://www.ncca.ie/media/3196/3754_ncca_
researchreport19_lr.pdf [accessed 29 October 2019].
O’Kane, M .& Murphy, R. (2016). Transition from preschool to primary school in Ireland: audit of transfer
documentation in Ireland, available: https://ncca.ie/media/3195/national-audit-draft-10.pdf [accessed 20
February 2020].
Ring, E., Mhic Mhathúna, M., Moloney, M., Hayes, N., Breathnach, D., Stafford, P., Carswell,
D., Keegan, S., Kelleher, C., McCafferty, D., O’Keeffe, A., Leavy, A., Madden, R.& Ozonyia, M.
(2016). An examination of concepts of school readiness among parents and educators in Ireland, Dublin:
Department of Children and Youth Affairs, available: https://arrow.tudublin.ie/cgi/viewcontent.
cgi?article=1031&context=aaschsslrep [accessed 29 October 2019].
SCCC/Sligo County Childcare Committee (2015). All About Me, 2nd ed, Sligo: Childcare Committees
Ireland.
Schram, A. B. (2014). ‘A Mixed Methods Content Analysis of the Research Literature in Science
Education’, International Journal of Science Education, 36 (15) pp. 2619-2638.
Smith, N. and Glass, W. (2019) ‘Ready or not? Teachers’ perceptions of young children’s school
readiness’, Journal of Early Childhood Research, 17(4), 1-18.
Wicklow County Childcare Committee (2009). Press Release Minister for Children and Youth Affairs Barry
Andrews welcomes free preschool year in early childhood care and education (ECCE) [press release], 7 Apr,
available: http://wicklowcountychildcare.ie/Press%20Release%20070409.doc [accessed 17 December
2019].
16Early Years Practitioners’ perspectives of the inter-related
concepts of ‘school readiness’ and transition
by Kathy Carter, Dr Niamh Gallagher
Keywords: School Readiness Transition Constructions
Socio-Ecological Theory Early Years Practitioner
Kathy Carter: Kathy Carter is an Early Years Lecturer in the Access Department at Northern Regional
College, Ballymena. She has also operated a preschool service in County Donegal for 17 years. She holds
an MA in Leadership in Early Years from IT Sligo, and a BA (Hons) in Early Childhood from Teesside
University.
Dr Niamh Gallagher: Dr Niamh Gallagher is a Lecturer at IT, Sligo with specialisms in the area of
Transitions and Inclusive Practices. She is a CORU registered Speech & Language Therapist and has been
involved in the implementation of a variety of transition programmes for children impacted by additional
needs.
Abstract
Within the national context, there has been an increased focus and emphasis on the role
of the early years practitioner (EYP) in preparing children and families for the transition to
primary school and for school readiness.
The overarching aim of this research was to qualitatively explore EYPs’ constructions of the
concepts of ‘school readiness’ and ‘transitions’ and examine if, how, and in what manner
these constructions shaped their work practices in preparing children and families for the
transition to primary school.
Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a small sample of EYPs located in North-
West Ireland. The narratives arising from the data generation process were then analysed
thematically.
Key findings revealed that EYPs considered the onus of responsibility in preparing the
child for primary school lay with them. A lack of pedagogical continuity, collaboration, and
communication from schools and inconsistent practices regarding transfer documentation
were identified as key concerns. Findings also revealed that social and emotional
competencies were perceived to be the most significant aspects of a child’s readiness for a
successful transition to school.
Outcomes point to the need for all stakeholders involved in the process of supporting
children’s readiness for school, and to work collaboratively to ensure seamless transition
experiences.
Introduction
Both internationally and nationally, there have been significant recent advancements in the
conceptualisation of the inter-related concepts of school readiness and transitions.
Within the Irish context, there has been an increased focus and emphasis on the significance
of the role of the EYP in preparing children and families for the transition to primary school
and for the child’s school readiness, and indeed on the need for EYPs and primary teachers
(PTs) to work collaboratively in these endeavours (O’Kane 2016; O’Kane and Murphy, 2016;
NCCA, 2018; DCYA, 2019).
17A more contemporary understanding of the definition of school readiness, away from
the traditional, developmental perspective has been posited, with a move to a more
collaborative, inclusive, and holistic definition, focusing on the concepts of ready children,
ready schools, and ready families (UNICEF, 2012, p.6). However, little is known in relation
to EYPs’ perspectives on these inter-related dimensions of school readiness or practitioners’
views about their perceived relationship to the process of transitioning to primary school.
Further research specifically exploring how EYPs construct school readiness and transitions
and how such constructions shape both professional and interprofessional work practices of
the EYP in the transition process will help in addressing these knowledge gaps.
Aim of Research
The overarching aim of this study was to qualitatively explore from a socio-ecological
perspective, EYPs’ constructions of the inter-related concepts of school readiness and
transitions and to examine if and how these constructions shape EYPs’ transition practices.
More specifically, the study aimed to explore if EYPs’ perspectives were informed by
traditional developmental/maturations conceptualisations of school readiness or more
contemporary, holistic, and inclusive definitions.
Specific objectives, framed in UNICEF’s (2012) holistic conceptualisation of school readiness,
explored EYPs’ perspectives of the concepts of:
• ‘Ready Child’, that is, as it relates to school readiness and children’s learning and
development processes,
• ‘Ready School’, with particular focus on the school environment and the practices that
facilitate effective seamless transitions,
• ‘Ready Family’, with reference to how the attitudes and involvement of parents influence
and shape the child’s lived experiences of transitioning.
Literature Review
Within the Irish context, school readiness and the transition to primary school was, until
recently, a relatively under researched area (Hanniffy, 2017). However, within the past decade
this has changed, with several major research studies emerging including a comprehensive
review of the transition from preschool to primary school (0’Kane, 2016); an audit of transfer
documentation in the transition process (O’Kane and Murphy, 2016); an evaluation of
the NCCA’s (2018) primary school transition initiative and an examination of the concepts of
school readiness among parents and educators (Ring et al., 2017).
One of the major recommendations from such studies was the need for greater alignment
in curriculum and pedagogy across settings. Another proposal was for improved
communication and collaboration between EYPs and PTs, particularly in relation to transfer
documentation.
In line with these recommendations, the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment
(NCCA), introduced Mo Scéal (NCCA, 2019) - transition template reports for use by EYPs and
furthermore, First 5 (DCYA, 2019) advocates for the significance of the need to support both
the child’s and family’s transition to primary school.
Theoretical framework & methodology
This exploratory study aligned with Stake’s (1995) and Yin’s (2009) approach to case study
methodology and was conducted using qualitative research methods. The study was framed
in Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory (Bronfenbrenner, 1979) and the tenets of
social constructionism (Burr, 1995). Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory has relevance
18for children as they make the transition from preschool to primary school as it views
child development as a complex system of relationships affected by multiple levels of the
surrounding environment including family, school and broader cultural values, laws, and
customs (Bronfenbrenner, 1979).
A sample of 12 EYPs was selected from a small geographical region in the North-West of
Ireland, using purposive, non-probability techniques. The qualitative data were constructed
using semi-structured interviews with EYPs. Interviews were conducted face to face,
digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. Both inductive and deductive approaches to
data analysis occurred. Firstly, the principles and procedures of Braun and Clarke’s (2006)
thematic analysis informed the initial coding and categorisation processes. In turn, categories
generated were further analysed through the lens of UNICEF’s (2012) themes of, ready child,
ready schools, and ready families.
Ethical considerations
Ethical clearance was granted by the Department of Social Sciences Research Ethics
Committee, at the Institute of Technology, Sligo. In line with the Institute’s Research Ethics
and GDPR guidelines (2018), practices adhered to included that of voluntary participation,
secure data storage (data were stored in a password protected digital file and deleted after a
period of ten months), informed consent, participant anonymity, confidentiality and right to
withdraw.
Main findings and discussion
Data were interpreted in the context of UNICEF’s (2012) inter-connected themes of ready
child, ready family, and ready school.
Theme 1 – Ready Children
Key findings here revealed that participants were unanimous in their interpretations and
constructions of school readiness, identifying social and emotional competencies as being
the most significant aspects of a child’s readiness for transition. The following represents the
view of most participants.
‘I would look at how they regulate their emotion… I would be looking at their social and
emotional development’ (PO6).
Their constructions, therefore, align with UNICEF’s (2012) conceptualisation of the ‘ready
child’ dimension of school readiness which resonates with much of the more recent
literature in this field (Niklas et al., 2018; McGettigan & Gray, 2012; Ring et al., 2017).
When exploring how their understandings of school readiness influenced their practice,
all EYPs referenced their use of Aistear (NCCA, 2009). They identified this as the most
appropriate curricular framework to use when planning to prepare a child for school in
relation to their cognitive, social, and emotional readiness.
While these constructions of readiness appear to influence EYPs’ practice and the use
of Aistear (NCCA, 2009) to guide same, further research is required to ascertain which
specific activities, programmes and strategies are used to promote social and emotional
competencies in preparation for the transition to school.
Theme 2 – Ready Schools
Participants were asked whether schools played a role in relation to preparing children for
the transition to school and if so, what that role entailed.
19Here, participants discussed topics such as the role of the school environment and of
primary teachers’ (PTs’) practices for supporting effective transitions and readiness.
Regarding PTs’ preparation of the environment, participants were asked if they knew if
Aistear was being implemented as a curricular framework within the junior infant classroom.
In summary, many participants reported that, in their view, Aistear was used as a reward
at the end of the day or week, as opposed to a framework that guided general educational
practices.
‘I’ve heard the parents from previous students talk about Aistear in Junior Infants as golden
hour. It is a case of… Aistear turned on… Aistear turned off. Aistear is… almost treated like
play’ (P03).
‘Yes, I do know they have it, but I just think it’s called golden hour. I don’t think it is like the
main thing they do’ (P06).
When questioned regarding the use of transfer documentation, all participants reported
that they were aware of transition statements and reporting templates available for use by
EYPs. Interestingly, some noted that they had made the decision not to complete them,
whilst others iterated that they fully supported these practices and the importance of
providing schools with information in relation to children’s learning stories and school
readiness. However, in the case of the latter, the general view was that the onus was on EYPs
to initiate communication with primary schools, to offer transition statements, and discuss
the importance of such statements in supporting children’s transitions. While half of the
participants agreed that children’s transition statements were well-received by schools, not all
were convinced they were read or used by PTs.
‘I think that the schools are putting the onus on us as a service; and I’ve been that person
that’s got the phone call from the school saying, we have a child that’s come from your
service, and they are really unsettled… Well really?... If you read their statement, you would
know they take time to settle’ (P01).
Most participants felt that the onus of responsibility for facilitating the child’s school
readiness and successful transition lay largely with the EYP sector and not primary schools.
Aside from conducting single open days and some schools sending home ‘summer packs that
included crayons, colouring sheets, activity sheets and scissors etc.,’ (P03), participants were unable
to identify any other practices that primary schools initiated. Accounts of collaborative
practices and joint initiatives to support school readiness were minimal in contrast to the
policy recommendations referred to earlier (NCCA, 2019; DCYA, 2019).
Several participants discussed how they contacted local schools to request a visit from
respective junior infant teachers but that this practice never materialised and was viewed as a
missed opportunity.
‘We have never been successful in getting the principal or the infant teachers to come and
visit us here. It’s not practical for us here to take them to visit, no bus, financially and
everything else’ (P03).
While examining the relationship between settings and schools, it must be noted that there
is currently no national policy specifically relating to the transition to primary school. As a
result, the relationships and practices that occur between settings and schools are happening
informally and at a local level. Practices are very much dependent on both teachers’ priorities
and the proximity of settings. This was clear in the data generated.
20As with previous research conducted in the Irish context, findings here clearly demonstrate
the need for greater collaboration and continuity between early years settings and primary
schools to better facilitate school readiness and seamless transitions (O’Kane and Murphy,
2016; Ring et al., 2017).
It is therefore recommended that a more co-ordinated approach to school readiness be
implemented and that a national policy on transitioning be introduced, advocating for
improved collaboration between early years’ settings and schools. Also, to ensure improved
pedagogical continuity, it is recommended that Aistear (NCCA, 2009) become a more
prominent feature of the junior school curriculum, and both teachers and EYPs be offered
appropriate support and training to ensure effective implementation of same.
Theme 3 – Ready Families
Participants were also asked about the significance of families in ‘school readiness’. Here,
the EYPs were of the general view that parents have a significant responsibility in preparing
children for school.
EYPs felt that they played an important role in helping parents understand the different
developmental stages of children and what is perceived to be important in readying children
for the transition. EYPs also noted their remit in informing parents of the important role
they can play in delivering on many of the objectives of Aistear’s communication, identity
and belonging, exploring, and thinking and wellbeing themes. Participants identified
activities that they felt were important for parents to engage in with children to facilitate
readiness for school. These included, for example, reading, cooking, singing, doing puzzles,
building blocks, spending time together, and teaching the children how to share and take
turns.
‘Some parents don’t realise that they need to be doing these things at home too, so it’s good
that we can encourage them and explain to them the importance of their involvement in
getting the child ready for school’ (P08).
The consensus was that a child’s readiness for school was deeply influenced by the attitudes
and involvement of parents in the transition process and the preparation for same.
Workshops, open days, parent-teacher meetings and play dates were identified as essential to
ensuring the involvement of parents.
‘I know a lot of our parents come in and say, ‘What should I be doing with my child every
day?’ Sometimes we talk about that in our open day, whenever the child is enrolling’ (P05).
In general, findings resonate with previous accounts (Niklas et al., 2018; McGettigan & Gray,
2012; Ring et al., 2017), that parental attitudes, as well as meaningful parental involvement
are key in supporting the ready family dimension of school readiness. Findings here were
encouraging as all EYPs reported that they were positively engaged with parental partnership
and prioritised the fostering of strong and supportive relationships with parents. In
summary, EYPs’ practices were very much in line with their beliefs about the importance of
working collaboratively with parents to support children’s transitions.
The development of a series of information booklets on the features of holistic and inclusive
interpretations of school readiness that can be shared with parents to support them in
preparing their children for school may be useful here. Furthermore, it was recommended
that EYPs be fully supported by Government to access training and financial supports to
further develop their partnership practices with both parents and schools.
21Conclusions
School readiness and transitions are interpreted by EYPs as complex and multi-faceted
constructs, which in turn shape how they engage with their role in preparing children for the
transition to primary school. This complexity requires that all stakeholders involved in the
process of supporting children’s readiness for school must work collaboratively to arrive at a
shared and mutually agreed-upon definition of ‘school readiness’ before more effective child
and family-centred practices can be developed in this regard.
Given the small scale and the limited sample size of the present study, results should be
interpreted with caution. Whilst generalisability to other national or international early years
contexts is not possible, nonetheless, the outcomes provide much food for reflection and
discussion regarding the role of the EYP in the transition process, guidelines for best practice
and avenues for further research and exploration.
References:
Braun, V. & Clarke, V., (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology,
3 (2) pp. 77-101.
Bronfenbrenner, U., (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Burr, Vivien, (1995). An Introduction to Social Constructionism. London: Routledge. Available at:
An Introduction to Social Constructionism By Vivien Burr | Used | 9780415104050 | World of Books
[Accessed 27 September 2021].
General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). 2018. General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) – [online]
Available at: [Accessed 20 October 2018].
Government of Ireland (2018). First 5: A Whole-of-Government Strategy for Babies, Young Children and their
Families 2019-2028. Dublin: Government Publications.
Hanniffy, M. (2017). An exploration of perceptions of school readiness. PhD. NUI Galway.
McGettigan, I., and Gray, C. (2012). ‘Perspectives on school readiness in rural Ireland: the experiences
of parents and children’. International Journal of Early Years Education, [Online], 20(1), pp.15-29. Available
at: DOI: 10.1080/09669760.2012.664465 [Accessed 23 Oct 2018].
National Council for Curriculum and Assessment, (2009). Aistear; the Early Childhood Curriculum
Framework. Available at: http://www.ncca.ie [Accessed 20 October 2018].
National Council for Curriculum and Assessment, (2018). Final report of the NCCA’s preschool to primary
school transition initiative. Available at: https://ncca.ie/media/3195/national-audit-draft-10.pdf [Accessed
26 February 2021].
National Council for Curriculum and Assessment, (2019). Mo Scéal. Available at: https://www.ncca.ie/
en/early-childhood/mo-scéal [Accessed 26 May 2019].
Niklas, F., Cohrssen, C., Vidmar, M., Segerer, R., Schmiedeler, S., Galpin, R., Klemm, V., Kandler,
S. and Tayler, C. (2018). ‘Early childhood professionals’ perceptions of children’s school readiness
characteristics in six countries’. International Journal of Educational Research, [Online] 90, pp.144-159.
22You can also read
